By using this site, you agree to our Privacy Policy and our Terms of Use. Close

Forums - Nintendo Discussion - My Defense to Nintendo's Youtube Policy

archer9234 on 07 April 2015
ToraTiger said:

I actually agree with Nintendo 100% on this Angry Joe B.s.  I don't enjoy L.Ps or any other non-gaming hobby that isn't video games.  I don't watch Youtube at all, but I never got the point of letting gamers make millions using other people's products to make commentary and reactions on them.  Look at it this way, shouldn't a movie company get money where ever a channel on T.V plays their film?  It's the same thing in this case.  They're getting ad money by entertaining people with someone else's copyrighted product.  I think Nintendo did a good job, and I honestly wished other game devs made a similar policy. 

This is only a bad move because Nintendo is now losing a lot of advertising, but they're partner share program is fair imo besides the fact that your channel can only play nintenod games...

 

Also lol@ letting people making millions by playing video games and stream, and worst is letting them take all the proceeds themselves..  

Problem with all this is the legal hole that hasn't been decided, yet. Are LP's fair use or not? Most people say yes. Because it's a review, in the general sense of someone watching someone play, and getting an impression of what the game is about. This will give them a deciding factor in buying it or not. Take this.

I recently have been watching a twitch streamer do Resident Evil month. It convinced me to buy the orignal release of RE1 DC. When I didn't want to bother. I have REmake on GC. Eventually, he will reach RE 5 and 6. Which I skipped. Due to all the hate. If I see him play it, I like it. Than he made capcom two sales.

But the other side, what Nintendo does is, it's not. There for, doesn't fall under this. I hope someone finally brings this to a court, and we get a definative answer.



Around the Network
97alexk on 07 April 2015

THIS! I couldn't agree with this more. Nintendo has every right to do so, and it makes me upset when these people who are subbed to angry joe are defending his ''pity me'' attitude. Everyone is buying it, and he has fooled his fanbase and just does what he wants to do, it wouldn't be so nice if i would steal angry joes content and make millions of dollars now would it, and i can just say ''well its free advertising for angry joe''! See that reason is not legit at all.



ihatefatkatz on 07 April 2015
torok said:
The problems isn't Nintendo wanting their share, you aren't getting the whole problem. The issue is that Nintendo not only wants THEIR share but they want to approve if a video can or can't be published. That rule allows Nintendo to block videos that criticize their games and just allow videos that are being generous to their products. That's, effectively, censorship. If you do Nintendo videos, you, from now on, will probably try to just say good things so your video can get approved.

That's something that unnaceptable and a new low in trying to avoid people talking negative things about your game. That's worse than buying reviews, worse than review embargos simply because you are now choosing what can be said about your game. They can even block videos for a specific game! So if the f** badly a game, they simply won't allow any video to avoid having people telling the truth.

Nintendo have not been censoring criticism. 

They have even stipulated that they won't reject application on opinion or views

https://r.ncp.nintendo.net/guide/

You are just finding issues that don't exist



ToraTiger on 07 April 2015
bunchanumbers said:
ToraTiger said:

I actually agree with Nintendo 100% on this Angry Joe B.s.  I don't enjoy L.Ps or any other non-gaming hobby that isn't video games.  I don't watch Youtube at all, but I never got the point of letting gamers make millions using other people's products to make commentary and reactions on them.  Look at it this way, shouldn't a movie company get money where ever a channel on T.V plays their film?  It's the same thing in this case.  They're getting ad money by entertaining people with someone else's copyrighted product.  I think Nintendo did a good job, and I honestly wished other game devs made a similar policy. 

This is only a bad move because Nintendo is now losing a lot of advertising, but they're partner share program is fair imo besides the fact that your channel can only play nintenod games...

 

Also lol@ letting people making millions by playing video games and stream, and worst is letting them take all the proceeds themselves..  


Nintendo isn't losing a lot of advertising. You can count on one had how many Nintendo videos Angry Joe made that featured Nintendo. Its like multiplying by zero. It will always equal zero.

Nintendo has been chitty about their Youtube policy for quite a while now, and I imagine if PewDiepie played something like Xenoblade the game would experience additional sales from his fanbase



3DS I.D : 3282-2755-4646

I make bad threads.  

SSB really went downhill after Melee....

Manlet Crew

ToraTiger on 07 April 2015
cycycychris said:
Honestly, most the people who complain about this never made Nintendo videos. Nintendo already has special deals with small and big channels that have supported Nintendo in the past. Play through channels still cover Nintendo's game.

Pewdiepie and AngryJoe never play nintendo games. I will say that it almost sounded like Angry Joe might have been planning to review some Nintendo games. A bit of a shame since I would have liked to see at least one of them.

That all said, I still think Nintendo should back off and let these Youtubers do there thing.

 

Do their* thing = Using copyrighted material like they own it and make millions in ad revenue? 



3DS I.D : 3282-2755-4646

I make bad threads.  

SSB really went downhill after Melee....

Manlet Crew

Around the Network
archer9234 on 07 April 2015
SpokenTruth said:
archer9234 said:

Problem with all this is the legal hole that hasn't been decided, yet. Are LP's fair use or not? Most people say yes. 

And most people would be wrong.  Fair Use requires that you do not profit directly from the trademark or copyright or that only a small portion of the IP is shown (15 seconds for audio is standard by the MPAA for instance).

Displaying the entire contents of an IP in a for-profit enterprise will not be granted Fair Use.  

 

If someone did their own commentary over a movie on Youtube with profit, Fair Use would never hold up.

Court still needs to decide if game play is the same thing or not, as displaying music, video, in its entirty. Since you're interacting with it. Wouldn't this also have made Twitch unviable, in the first place. Ads are placed on every single video.



kitler53 on 07 April 2015

i know. yesterday i was watching a film critic review a film and i was just soo angry that this guy be allowed to make a living by talking about someone else's copyrighted materials. life be just so much better if as a consumer i had no way to inform myself about a product until after i purchase it, amiright?



ToraTiger on 07 April 2015
archer9234 said:
ToraTiger said:

I actually agree with Nintendo 100% on this Angry Joe B.s.  I don't enjoy L.Ps or any other non-gaming hobby that isn't video games.  I don't watch Youtube at all, but I never got the point of letting gamers make millions using other people's products to make commentary and reactions on them.  Look at it this way, shouldn't a movie company get money where ever a channel on T.V plays their film?  It's the same thing in this case.  They're getting ad money by entertaining people with someone else's copyrighted product.  I think Nintendo did a good job, and I honestly wished other game devs made a similar policy. 

This is only a bad move because Nintendo is now losing a lot of advertising, but they're partner share program is fair imo besides the fact that your channel can only play nintenod games...

 

Also lol@ letting people making millions by playing video games and stream, and worst is letting them take all the proceeds themselves..  

Problem with all this is the legal hole that hasn't been decided, yet. Are LP's fair use or not? Most people say yes. Because it's a review, in the general sense of someone watching someone play, and getting an impression of what the game is about. This will give them a deciding factor in buying it or not. Take this.

I recently have been watching a twitch streamer do Resident Evil month. It convinced me to buy the orignal release of RE1 DC. When I didn't want to bother. I have REmake on GC. Eventually, he will reach RE 5 and 6. Which I skipped. Due to all the hate. If I see him play it, I like it. Than he made capcom two sales.

But the other side, what Nintendo does is, it's not. There for, doesn't fall under this. I hope someone finally brings this to a court, and we get a definative answer.

I hope the definitive answer is that they can stream, but Nintendo gets most of the reveune.  Hell I wish Sony, MS and others get on this boat.  Nintendo's greed actually makes sense to me this time around



3DS I.D : 3282-2755-4646

I make bad threads.  

SSB really went downhill after Melee....

Manlet Crew

97alexk on 07 April 2015
ToraTiger said:
cycycychris said:
Honestly, most the people who complain about this never made Nintendo videos. Nintendo already has special deals with small and big channels that have supported Nintendo in the past. Play through channels still cover Nintendo's game.

Pewdiepie and AngryJoe never play nintendo games. I will say that it almost sounded like Angry Joe might have been planning to review some Nintendo games. A bit of a shame since I would have liked to see at least one of them.

That all said, I still think Nintendo should back off and let these Youtubers do there thing.

 

Do their* thing = Using copyrighted material like they own it and make millions in ad revenue? 

my personal opinion. I dont wanna have pewdiepie anywhere near nintendo games.



OdinHades on 07 April 2015

I don't think any YouTuber makes millions with Nintendo games... I very much doubt that any Lets Player besides Pewdiepie makes millions at all. The biggest cut goes to Google. And guess what, Google doesn't have to Pay Shit to Nintendo.



Official member of VGC's Nintendo family, approved by the one and only RolStoppable. I feel honored.